I drove Fords until the 6.0 came out, then made the switch. I still miss my 99 7.3, awesome rig.

Trailer is a 30 bunkhouse around 8000 lbs and truck is a cab and chassis 4x4 with a steel tow bed, 9200 empty, 4.10 gears. We are running about 3-4k heavier then your setup. Empty 18-20 and with the airstream 13-14.

Sent from my iPhone using Airstream Forums

I also had a 99 7.3.

What amazed me with that truck was that I could run 70 keeping RPMs just under 2K and get 22 mpg or better under almost any circumstance.

Never had a truck do better for fuel mileage after that but my current truck is the quietest, cleanest, and nicest riding truck I have ever owned.

As a previous owner of a 2010 VW sportwagen TDI, I like the diesel but the reality of difference in initial cost, special oil/expensive filter changes, more expensive fuel costs-- made me rethink the whole idea of oil burner. Years ago my family had diesel rabbits and we loved them, all but the poorly designed add-on AC units with bad compressor brackets breaking from vibration (dealers had to add AC on them after the fact for the first so many years). Today though is a different time. The EPA has all but killed the benefit of diesels and if you look at the chart, right now the best engine would be the Honda or the Ford Ecoboost. I would not be able to use the wimpy Honda truck with my trailer weight so that leaves the Ecoboost.

There ARE applications that are better suited to diesel though as I said earlier no diesel UNLESS you need it. Bigger heavier trucks and fuel storage are the two benefits. Diesels are good engines and offer savings in particular applications.

Due to some weight loss in the front of the truck, the turbo EGT reports 200 to 250 degree cooler running temperatures and does not exceed 1200 degrees in a hard uphill pull at 65mph with the GCVW at nearly 19,000 pounds. The cooling fan will occasionally come up to speed on a pull like this, but the engine is running at the recommended temps along with transmission and rear end.

Interesting set of data. I believe the first graph showing that the diesel gets 15% better fuel economy than the the gassers is spot on.

When it gets real specific is where I have a problem. My 2008 Tundra, 2wd with the 5.7L and 6 speed, gets very good fuel economy for a TV. Naked it gets 19-20 on the road. Towing my rig this summer over 2,000 miles, my mileage has been right at 13.5 mpg. Now my rig is light at 11,500 lbs and I go 55-65 mph.

Where I question the validity of the survey makers is why they included a Honda Element and a Nissan Xterra in the survay? These are not TV.

I bought my 2wd Tundra new in 08 for 25k and it has been very reliable. It only has 53k on it. I hope to get at least 300k out of it. I can keep up with most diesels on a steep grade if I want to burn the gas, but I really don't care if they pass me.

Interesting set of data. I believe the first graph showing that the diesel gets 15% better fuel economy than the the gassers is spot on.

When it gets real specific is where I have a problem. My 2008 Tundra, 2wd with the 5.7L and 6 speed, gets very good fuel economy for a TV. Naked it gets 19-20 on the road. Towing my rig this summer over 2,000 miles, my mileage has been right at 13.5 mpg. Now my rig is light at 11,500 lbs and I go 55-65 mph.

Where I question the validity of the survey makers is why they included a Honda Element and a Nissan Xterra in the survey? These are not TV.

I bought my 2wd Tundra new in 08 for 25k and it has been very reliable. It only has 53k on it. I hope to get at least 300k out of it. I can keep up with most diesels on a steep grade if I want to burn the gas, but I really don't care if they pass me.

Dan

A Honda Odyssey isn't a TV either, and yet how many people in this forum are towing with one? So we can't say that it's not a TV if a dozen people are towing with it, it's fair comparison.

As to the complaints in this thread about others getting better MPG, please remeber the results are averages.

For example, on another forum for Trailblazer owners I am a part of most folks report getting never better than 16mpg. But we always got 18-19mpg. There are many factors that go into this. How we drive, climate, terrain, etc.

Yes, this is a contentious issue (with long history), probably because most of us have spent a pretty penny on our tow vehicles (as well as our trailers) and want everyone to agree that we made the perfect choice. Human nature is like that.

Yes, this is a contentious issue (with long history), probably because most of us have spent a pretty penny on our tow vehicles (as well as our trailers) and want everyone to agree that we made the perfect choice. Human nature is like that.

So true!!!! For that reason here is my bottom line logic... If you tow a lot, diesel is the smart choice as it is built to be loaded and will get a much longer life comparatively speaking to a similar gas version. If your are the occasional tower, then a diesel is a big waste of money...

Using that reasoning then an AS is a waste of money if you only use it occasionally. Just buy an sob, it will just barely do the job. Jim

I guess it is subjective what a waste of money is. I don't own an Airstream or boat to save $$. We like to enjoy our life, so that is where we spend our $$. I like my diesel trucks (we own two) and tow a lot, so makes sense for us. But if I tried to justify saving money by playing boats and rv then I am just lying to myself.

We like diesel engines. In our smaller vehicles, we get 30% minimum better milage over the same vehicles with the same displacement gas engine.

We have a 2002 Mercedes E320 straight six 3.2L turbo diesel station wagon in the UK that is quicker off the line and better milage (30%) than the 3.2L straight 6 gas per the sales literature. This engine has the Bosch mechanical fuel injection pump and will still be running when the metal falls off the car body...

I drive a continuous four wheel drive 2007 Mercedes ML 320 CDI diesel and see 27.5 to 28 mpg with the 3.0L V6 turbo diesel chipped by the factory to be called a model 320 versus a 280 with less power chip. The 3.2L V6 gas sees is in the low 20s.

My wife has a 2009 Mercedes E320 CDI sedan and we see 39 on the highway. Same size gas engine is in the mid 20s.

Our 2012 Dodge with Cummins gets better mpg due to some changes that make it operate cooler and more efficiently. I see 10.5 mpg going through the mountains getting out of Phoenix to the east and around 14 on the level at a GCVW approaching 19,000 pounds.

Diesels are capable of a 30% better fuel economy than gas engines without the "hybrid" battery junk which is bad for the environment when the batteries die and have to be replaced at great expense (if the warranty has expired). The used value of a Prius has to be dropped the closer it gets to the 5 to 6 thousand dollar battery replacement time.

Yes, this is a contentious issue (with long history), probably because most of us have spent a pretty penny on our tow vehicles (as well as our trailers) and want everyone to agree that we made the perfect choice. Human nature is like that.

I think you hit the nail on the head. I did not pay much for my POS Excursion but it gets the job done with capacity to spare. I am cheap and drive vehicles till the wheels fall off. I have had a diesel and they are a time and money pit and since I do the work it matters.

Perry

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoldAdventure

Yes, this is a contentious issue (with long history), probably because most of us have spent a pretty penny on our tow vehicles (as well as our trailers) and want everyone to agree that we made the perfect choice. Human nature is like that.